Volunteer to be at RADIUSEXT meeting on Friday

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Since I cannot be there myself, can anyone volunteer
please. The discussion is as below. So I guess if you
can just gove some answers that may come up that that 
is enuf. Of course if you want to volunteer some work,
that would be helpfull too. But at the other hand,
we do want the RADIUS community themselves to first
try to find volunteers among themselves.

Thanks,
Bert 

--------------------

> > Is it that we OUGHT to improve them for IPv6 support and what kind
> > of thing might be needed? Is it to try and motivate some people
> > to volunteer for that work?
> 
> Both.
> 
So you/we do expect that Radius (Radiusext) will indeed live and flourish
on IPv6 networks? 

So it would be to address the issues brought up in
   draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-ops-03.txt
w.r.t. RFCs 2618 and 2619

In any event, both MIB modules are basically read only, and I think
it would boild down to deprecating a single IPAddress object
in each of them and adding a new set of InetAddressType/InetAddress
objects to each. 
That then results in deprecating the current compliance and write
a new one.
And then of course you would have to do all the admin/bureucratic changes
for
- mib boilerplate
- security considerations 
- normative/informative references

It seems not to big of an effort to me if that is all.
I can even submit drafts myself if that helps. But better try to 
find some other WG participants first.

> >
> > I see that currently you do not have revised MIB documents on the
> > list of work items or milestones.
> 
> Well, Robert Moskowitz wants to do a "client kickstart" which could be
> handled as part of a MIB revision.  But he has no expertise 
> in designing MIBs so we're still a bit short there.
> 
Aha... so that is additional functionality. 
I am willing to help him write it up in MIB objects if he tells me
what the sort of management information pieces are for that
functionaility.

I will check with MIB doctors is one of them can be at the meeting
on Friday. If not, can you handle ith with the above input?

Bert